Friday, May 29, 2020 | Last Update : 07:03 AM IST

65th Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra56948179181897 Tamil Nadu185459909136 Delhi152577264303 Gujarat152057549938 Rajasthan79474566178 Madhya Pradesh72613927313 Uttar Pradesh69913991182 West Bengal41921578289 Andhra Pradesh3245213359 Bihar300680014 Karnataka249379347 Punjab2106191840 Telangana2098132163 Jammu and Kashmir192185426 Odisha16608877 Haryana138183818 Kerala10885558 Assam832884 Uttarakhand493794 Jharkhand4621914 Chandigarh3641894 Chhatisgarh364830 Tripura2421650 Himachal Pradesh223634 Goa68370 Puducherry49170 Meghalaya20121 Nagaland1800 Manipur540 Arunachal Pradesh210 Mizoram110 Sikkim100

Supreme Court reserves verdict on Nirbhaya convict’s plea

THE ASIAN AGE. | PARMOD KUMAR
Published : Jan 29, 2020, 1:58 am IST
Updated : Jan 29, 2020, 2:35 am IST

Curative petition by Mukesh and Vinay Sharma was rejected on January 14, 2020.

Supreme Court of India (Photo: File)
 Supreme Court of India (Photo: File)

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a plea by one of the Nirbhaya case death row convicts, Mukesh, challenging the rejection of his mercy petition by the President on the ground that the entire material relating to the case was not placed before President Ram Nath Kovind.

The order will be pronounced on Wednesday.

Reserving the order, a bench comprising Justice R. Banumathi, Justice Ashok Bhushan, and Justice A.S. Bopanna observed that they have limited jurisdiction in going into the rejection of the mercy petition by the President and they would check if all the relevant documents relating to the 2012 gangrape case were placed before him.

Questioning the rejection of the mercy petition by the President in the absence of the entire record of the case, senior counsel Anjana Prakash told the court that the Tihar jail authorities enclosed only the nominal roll of Mukesh, his medical report, trial court judgment, and the details of the punishment along with the mercy petition. Ms Prakash contended that there was non-application of mind by the President.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, disputed that only limited records relating to the case were sent to the President for deciding the mercy petition by Mukesh.

He handed over to the court two files — one containing notings and the other correspondences relating to the case.

Curative petition by Mukesh and Vinay Sharma was rejected on January 14, 2020.

Contending that “justice hurried is justice buried,” Ms Prakash told the court that Mukesh was subjected to indignities during his incarceration in Tihar jail, including alleged forcible sex with Akshay Kumar and assaults on him requiring his treatment at hospitals.

The court was told that he was put in solitary confinement — a ground for the communisation of the death sentence — and the details of the same were not put before the President while deciding the mercy petition.

Mr Mehta said that the alleged indignities, claimed to have been heaped on Mukesh, could not be a ground for commutation of death sentence.

Tags: supreme court, ram nath kovind, nirbhaya case